Portable Chest Radiography Through Glass During COVID-19 Pandemic—Initial Experience in a Tertiary Care Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Portable chest radiograph for COVID-19 positive patients and persons under investigation can be acquired through glass doors or walls of isolation rooms to limit exposure to the pathogen and conserve resources. Purpose: To report our initial experience with acquiring portable chest radiographs through glass doors of isolation rooms. Methods: Only 1 of 2 radiology technologist team members donned personal protective equipment and stayed inside the isolation room, while the second technologist and the radiography unit remained outside during the procedure. First hundred radiographs acquired through glass at the emergency department of our institute formed the “through glass radiograph” group. Hundred consecutive portable chest radiographs performed in a conventional manner formed the “conventional radiograph” group for comparison. Imaging database and feedback from operations leader were used to identify occurrences of a failed procedure. Suggestion of repeating the study and comments related to quality of the study were recorded from the reports of the staff radiologist. Results: There was no instance of failed acquisition, nondiagnostic examination, or suggestion of repetition in both groups. No significant difference in the number of reports with quality related remarks ( P > .05) was found between the 2 groups. Radiography through glass doors was associated with increased suboptimal positioning related remarks in radiology reports ( P < .05). No significant association was identified among other comments about image quality. Conclusion: Our initial clinical experience suggests that the acquisition of portable chest radiographs through the glass doors of isolation rooms is technically feasible and results in diagnostic quality studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".